Monday, 7 January 2013

A good example of a leader of the home educating community

One of the things which I have observed over the years is the peculiar levels of anger displayed by many of the more high profile home educators in this country.

I then went on to elaborate on this theme, describing the various common factors which I had noticed in those who put themselves forward as being the representatives of the home educating community. I have been called upon to provide evidence for my claims, but that is not really possible without naming all the individuals concerned and matching them up with their disorders. This would have the appearance of a witch-hunt and I shall not be doing it. I am however prepared to give a link to the public and unprompted account of the life of one parent who, while not yet well known outside Doncaster, is Alison Sauer’s latest best friend.

As readers will be aware, Alison Sauer is a genuinely high profile home educator. There is a high turnover in those she trusts and regards as her lieutenants; both Tania Berlow and Jacqui Cox having served in this role at different times. Her latest confidante is a woman called Cheryl Moy. The two of them are currently working on a scheme provisionally called “HE Angels”, in which help and advice is provided to home educating parents who are struggling to cope. The good Lord alone have mercy upon the recipients of such ‘help’!

Here then, in her own words, is the life of a home educating parent who will be familiar to many in Yorkshire. Those who want an unvarnished portrait of British home education could do no better than to read this woman’s personal account of her life and those of her children. As will be seen, she is a very angry woman. Her anger is directed against almost everybody; teachers, psychologists, the fathers of her children and other home educators, to give a few examples. The damage that people like this inflict upon the cause of home education in this country is immense and anybody wondering why local authorities feel uneasy sometimes about children being educated at home would do well to study this. It also provides a lucid account of autonomous education in practice, as opposed to how this pedagogy is presented to outsiders.

But enough of me. Without further ado, let me present to you Cheryl Moy, alias Pink, AKA Chez:

77 comments:

I don't blame her, given how she and her son were treated. Thank God my child with autism was treated with curtesy and respect during the assessment process, otherwise I would have become just as angry.

Remind me again how this woman is regarded by you as 'a leader'? And, by the way, the only reason I know of Alison Sauer is because of your blog then, later, the committee hearings.

Perhaps you should stop making people 'high profile' by calling them that here? Just an idea.

So, apart from talking about people you don't like, is there anything about home education you'd like to say? Perhaps something about how to encourage positive relationships between HE'ers and LAs? Any thoughts on that?

Did you only read the most recent post, or have you read the posts such as the one from July as well:

http://pinkchez.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/what-you-see-is-not-truth.html

This women is encouraging people on Facebook to come to her so that she can help them deal with the LAs, that is why she is being seen as a leader. She also blocks or removes people from her groups if they don't agree with everything she says, so that those groups end up being biased and without a balance of views.

Not sure if it is Simon or someone else asking, but no, I only read the post Simon drew to our attention. I've never heard of her.

People only become leaders if we follow them. That may seem obvious and trite, but it's true.

However, I do have sympathy with people who struggle with the hegemony of ideas which is prevalent within HE and have got my own self into trouble many times myself with my unorthodoxy. (My kids sat exams!!!!EEEKKK!)

I am in many of the groups that Cheryl helps to Admin, I have never worried about a balance of views, she welcomes all opinions as long as they aren't abusive to another member, unlike some groups that will happily bad mouth someone that isn't even in the group!

Interesting. You evidently agree with me about this woman, but wish to represent her as being the exception, rather than the rule. I must point out again that she is at the moment working hand in glove with Alison Sauer and the two of them are constantly working, via facebook and elsewhere, to push their view of home education. You will recall that Alison Sauer was a witness at the recent select committee hearing and is generally regarded by many local authorities as being an expert on home education. Cheryl Moy is not some fringe nutter, but the authentic face of a major strand of British home education. The bullying tactics she employs are the same as those used by both Alison Sauer, and many other well known figures on the home education scene in this country.

What is there not to agree with. It's all there in black and white and pink. I think most of the HE community view her as entertainment rather than as a serious contender in the political arena of home education representation. Her drivel and nonsense aleviate the boredom I feel when my children are tucked up safely in their beds. My husband and I will often turn off the comedy channel to watch events unfold. However, it's becoming rather boring of late, as the plot and its eventual denumant is getting too predictable. We have noticed that Alison rarely involves herself in her battles with the dissenting. Please leave Chez alone. If you pick on her she may remove herself from the public eye and I need her for comedy relief.

She is some fringe nutter. Honestly, do you think anyone takes her seriously. Alison et al may get away with it. They have the correct accents, middle class personas, lifestyles etc. to be taken seriously by those in and with power. Their tactics are covert and disguised by garish puppets like Chez. We are aware of what is happening...however it seems you are confused about her status and not the HE community I am involved with.

For every example like this, one could find thousands of children who return from a day spent disrupting the lives of others in school, only to be kicked-out to make a nuisance of themselves with their neighbours while the parent(s) go about their "business" - often involving one or more "substances" (legal and illegal).

There are many more less extreme cases involving state-schooled children, where some support or intervention might improve lives, but you and the local authorities don't give a damn.

Even if the example you've given today was replicated in every home educating family, there would still not be any significant problem in comparison with the one that I've just described, yet that much bigger one is largely ignored. Perhaps home educators are seen as "low-hanging fruit" - while the much bigger pile of windfalls is left to rot.

You seem to be obsessed with a problem which - if it exists at all - is minuscule; yet you advocate applying disproportionate attention and resources, while serious, needy cases can go to hell. I think the one with the questionable mental state is you, Simon.

' a day spent disrupting the lives of others in school, only to be kicked-out to make a nuisance of themselves with their neighbours while the parent(s) go about their "business" - often involving one or more "substances" (legal and illegal).'

I think that what you are saying here is that some children at school are badly behaved and that of these, some of their parents drink alcohol and take illegal drugs. Have I got that right? You then go on to say we should not pay too much attention to the tens of thousands of children who are not being sent to school, because you are sure that quite a few school children are under-achieving.

This is a classic case of a false dichotomy. It is not at all the situation that those anxious about the welfare of children not at school are heedless of the problems of those who are. This is a neat piece of sophistry, but will not really work.

I have a suspicion that those who keep calling for 'evidence' are hoping to goad me into giving names and diagnoses. I am not minded to do so. If anybody wishes to email me, I am happy to be a little more forthcoming, but every time I mention a name here, there is furious indignation.

'if you and the authorities recognise the bigger problem, you're more keen on dealing with home educators. Why?'

Bit of a misunderstanding here! I am not in a position to deal with anybody, whether at school or not. I am a writer, not a government minister or local authroity officer. I am interested in home education, which I regard as fantastically effective and far more efficient than mass instruction in schools, and that is why I write about it here. I am pained to see the terrible view of home education which a lot of teachers have, a view which they gain largely from the posturing and attention seeking antics of those who wish to be spokespersons for the 'community'.

"I am pained to see the terrible view of home education which a lot of teachers have, a view which they gain largely from the posturing and attention seeking antics of those who wish to be spokespersons for the 'community'."

First of all, why would this be such a problem?

Secondly, the problem seems to be one you've whipped-up in your own mind, given that you can't provide any anonymised statistical evidence to support your case.

You seem to be trying to turn it into a real problem by repeating a lot of anecdotes and innuendo. If someone like you repeatedly makes allegations like the one you've made here over the last few days, then some will pass eventually pass into commonly believed myth and urban legend. Your strategy seems to be "throw enough mud and some will stick".

"I have a suspicion that those who keep calling for 'evidence' are hoping to goad me into giving names and diagnoses. I am not minded to do so."

On the contrary, Simon; I (and others, no doubt), want to see numbers.

I want to see: - your chosen definition of mental state; - the way in which this has been measured; - your chosen significance threshold; - the definition of the home education leader sample; - the definition of the control sample(s) from other leadership groups; - the raw - ANONYMISED - data; - the statistical tests used; - the resultant difference, significance levels/p-values.

Clear enough? Failing that, the raw, anonymised data will do and we can take care of the rest.

Simon responded to this - without offering any substantial answers - on the previous thread. Here is my response:

No, I am not an economist, nor am I anyone you have been writing about.

These methods aren't confined to economics; if you knew the first thing about statistical inference and scientific method (i.e., getting at the truth, rather than making it up), you would have immediately recognised and understood the kind of things I requested. There's nothing at all unusual, and this applies across diverse fields: social, physical and life sciences, engineering, humanities... just about everything where measurement can be applied - and the measures don't have to be quantitative. None of this is rocket science, and from what I know of home educators - personally and from comments on this blog - quite a few could tackle this routinely, given access to the data.

Such methods are used to translate conjecture and hypothesis into tested theory; allowing us to make statements with some foundation.

Which leads us to your assertion about the mental state of "leaders" among home educators. In particular, we should be interested in whether your claim has any significance. Several respondents have indicated that leaders in many fields sometimes exhibit attributes that might, in some quarters, be considered "deviant". You were offered the opportunity to substantiate your claim - to show that leading home educators really do exhibit a significantly higher level of abnormal behaviour.

It's clear from your response that you can't even understand the question or why it is important, let alone provide a coherent response.

There is no need for me to comment further; I can leave readers to draw their own conclusions.

But this is not some dissertation that requires critical analysis, it's an individuals musings. Just because an individual decides not to embark on lengthy research to prove a hypothesis, doesn't automatically disprove it. If you really are of a mind, why don't you research it and present your findings here. Otherwise, as you have probably said on here a couple of times already " There is no need for me to comment further"!

"I am pained to see the terrible view of home education which a lot of teachers have, a view which they gain largely from the posturing and attention seeking antics of those who wish to be spokespersons for the 'community'."

First of all, why would this be such a problem?

Secondly, the problem seems to be one you've whipped-up in your own mind,'

It is a problem for me because I am a very fervent supporter of home education and want people to realise that it is a viable option to school. This is not really a problem whipped up in my mind. Do you really never stop to ask yourself why people in local authorities, newspapers and government departments regularly call for tighter controls on the practice? Do you honestly think that I am imagining this? And do you not realise that a large part of the problem is caused by home educators themselves and the stance which they adopt?

"Do you really never stop to ask yourself why people in local authorities, newspapers and government departments regularly call for tighter controls on the practice?"

This is in no small part due to people like you spreading lies and innuendo, or fabricating unsubstantiated conjecture suggesting that the leaders of home education exhibit significantly greater levels of mental or related disorders.

Remember the Victor Climbie or Khyra Ishaq cases?

"Do you honestly think that I am imagining this? "

You are certainly imagining there to be much bigger problems than really exist. In addition you fabricate issues which don't really exist.

"And do you not realise that a large part of the problem is caused by home educators themselves and the stance which they adopt?"

There are crazy people in leadership in all walks of life; ever looked at politicians?

'But Simon has made assertions, going beyond mere musing or conjecture, implying a degree of substantiation which does not exist; regardless of whether or not it is true, that is fraudulent.'

This is a classic instance of the logical fallacy known as 'begging the question'. You take it as given that I have implied a degree of substantiation which does not exist and then use this to demonstrate, to your own satisfaction, that this is fraudulent. This is complete nonsense. I explained what I had observed, the sort of places where I had gathered my admittedly partial and sometimes questionable data and the conclusion I had drawn from these data. Your talk of fraud would only be possible had I actually misled anybody as to the sources of my information; that is to say blogs, newspapers, television and radio reports, personal conversations and so on. Since I did not do so, talk of implying a greater degree of substantiation is meaningless. Unless of course you are just keen to use words like 'substantiation' regardless of whether they are appropriate in the context; in which case, go right ahead!

"I have been told that Cheryl Moy is a national Education Otherwise representative."

I don't know if she is a representative of Education Otherwise or not, but I do know that she is talking to LAs to 'sort them out'. These are not LAs where she is living, but in other parts of the country.

Cheryl lives in the same LA as I do and is working with them, along with a couple of families, she makes sure all the locals are kept up to date with happenings. I have no doubts over Cheryl's ability to ensure we have a law abiding LA. If you don't want her help then don't ask for it, but really do we need to be dragging her name through the mud? What do any of you do? Do any of you help other Home Educating families who need it? Ah no of course you don't you just moan and whine about those that won't sit back and be walked over. Jealousy is not a pleasant attribute.

Sorry I can only post as Anon for some reason, my name is Donna, I started Home Educating 2 years ago and Cheryl and others have been there for me, I know her in person, along with some people that don't like her, the difference is she doesn't slag them off!

Funds to fix her car not buy a car! with all the expenses she has incurred this last couple of years it is a lovely gesture to help her out. The Angels make it clear that any donations are used to reimburse expenses incurred by any Angel. Also the Angels themselves donated the most money to the fund. I was happy to donate even though I have not needed the Angels services.

I assume then that they have accounts that can be publicly scrutinized. Lots of people help out in the home ed world with out asking people to pay for their car repairs. A car which after all is there for the use of her and her family not to facilitate her position with the group.

Cheryl Moy, Alison Sauer and Wendy Charles Warner are all now EO rep of one descrtipiton or another and all run the HE Angels group together where they request that the members make donations to paying their expenses and car repairs as group leaders. Not surprisingly membership to the group is by invitation in case anyone gets access who might challenge their dominion or point out to the members where their money is going. Intrestingly this will be something that WCW can add to her cv of solicitor psycologist, super nan and model.

I'm sure she must be, if that is what she claims? Surely everyone knows its illegal to impersonate any figure in authority? Would be easy enough to check out though, (if anyone is concerned) libraries hold lists of all past and practicing solicitors/lawyers etc which legally you have to be registered with.

OMG do you lot have nothing better to do? I have come here to see what the fuss is about and I've glanced through I am bored to read it all. But the jist of it is that it seems you all like the sound of your own voices.

I am not a 'high profiler' I am 'significant' in my area - a position I have been left with and at this time am happy to contribute to the HE community in this way. I am a local representative and joining point and offer a balanced view when asked questions always pointing out both sides to an argument as far as I can. I detail what is on in the local area and signpost to others where I can.

We all contribute to the community - some more than others but everyone contributes in their own way be it big or small, in public or behind closed doors. If we further the information and profile of home education being a legal option and we do not want uneducated / unqualified monitors from the local government gaining a monopoly on how to educate our children should this be a position we are standing united together rather than this type of bickering and back biting which IS what gives HEers a bad name.

I don't think most individuals commenting on this thread would disagree with you on that score. The problem being when individuals have expressed opinions that don't agree with admin of certain HE groups, they are accused of bullying and subsequently blocked. This is hardly conducive to civilised and reasoned debate!

When the bickering and back biting is done in such a public domain (in full view of any passing EHEOs), is it any wonder that Local Authorities want to monitor what "nasties" go on behind closed doors?

LOL! You really think that people who work for LA's are shocked that there are people who don't get on with each other? {gasp!} Yes, what a surprise! I used to teach in schools and worse things happened in staffrooms.

I doubt that they are shocked but many people posting annonymously here are, I would like to bet, the very same who are "anti" visits or interacting with LA's. By being so vicious and nasty in an open public forum, their own words could very easily be used against them to justify monitoring.

Quite; on this basis, one could justify monitoring the entire population - but who would be suitable to handle that?

Simon Webb tries to convey the idea that home educators exhibit poorer standards of behaviour than the rest of the population, and that the authorities are somehow angelic characters who are shocked and horrified by them. So we're told to be on our best behaviour in case the authorities are watching.

Would these be the same kind of authorities that allow children in their care to die, or face rapes and beatings - and fund incompetent officials and highly-paid executives at public expense?

But the fault for this firmly lays at the feet of the aforementioned Cheryl moy. Who rather than engage in discussion on opposing views within the HE community, would rather belittle , dismiss and block constructive argument.Not the smartest of moves, as this blog serves to prove!

I have witnessed these events and i find it laughable that those claiming to have been blocked for disagreeing, are remembering events very differently. Cheryl was subject to a string of abusive comments and these comments are why members were deleted. Cheryl was thrown out of a group because admin didnt agree with her opinions and that group has continued to slate her even though she can not answer the accusations, yet people forget that, they choose to moan that Cheryl has kicked people out of a group, yet they were abusive, they didn't just have differing opinions! People need to move on, accepted that not everyone will get on, not everyone will like each other, just let it rest!

"Cheryl was thrown out of a group because admin didnt agree with her opinions and that group has continued to slate her even though she can not answer the accusations, yet people forget that, they choose to moan that Cheryl has kicked people out of a group, yet they were abusive, they didn't just have differing opinions! "

I was never abusive. All I did was suggest that some people like having home visits and we should be supportive of all HEers not just the ones that we agree with, and I dared to say that some LAs are good.

I was not only blocked from that group, but also deleted from a second group, which I hadn't posted to, with no explanation. I tried to assume good intent in case it was a mistake and enquired as to why I had been blocked and removed but all the admins, not just Cheryl Moy, refused to answer my enquiries, or those from others about the situation.

So are you saying that because Cheryl was thrown out of a group and unable to defend herself, it is okay for her to do the same to others?

Without getting into the specific rights and wrongs of this case, it's a truism that people learn by example; the abused become abusers. Good people end-up doing bad things, and unfortunately, many - perhaps most - people aren't able to break the cycle. This applies to everything from minor disagreements to all-out war.

Ah Sam Owen I presume? I have seen the messages left for you as to why you were removed from the group, you were also seen bad mouthing the administrators of said group. The administrators clearly state they have the right to refuse entry/remove from the group. That should be the end of the matter, but it isn't for you is it? You still involve yourself, only 2 days ago you were seen bad mouthing Cheryl again, this time with false allegations that you then were sent a PM correcting you, yet you didn't retract your comments, or correct the inaccuracies of your claims, you left your false allegations there for people to believe and carry on slating Cheryl. Cheryl has not mentioned anyone by name that has caused her problems, yet you, Jenny Kay, Karen Gallant, Daisy Haynes, June Wilson-Billing, Fiona Jayne Marshal, Maire Stafford etc continually keep bringing Cheryl's name up. If you do not like her then stay away from her! If you do not want to see how she talks to people, then don't look. Her friends list gets bigger when you all behave like this, her group membership gets bigger too, because you are all looking like bitter old women with a severe lack of self confidence to feel the need to slander one woman, she is only one woman! She doesn't have super powers, or minions, she has passion, sometimes misplaced, but she doesn't have a bad bone in her body. She is well respected by the majority, time to move on, surely?

Hi, I too have witnessed this behavior. They seem to jump on new HE already feeling a little nerved because of impending LA involvement. I too have suggested that surely engaging with the LA would for all concerned be the way forward. This way of thinking is completely rejected with no room for dialogue. They are very keen to share their already written letters in response to the LA's though. If you were in a state of fear because of LA involvement, would you not find them comforting? but is it in the long run, in the best interests of all concerned? I don't think so, and you CANNOT discuss it with them because before you know it, your outta there.

I continually bring Cheryl's name up? Hilarious. Someone has a very inflated sense of Cheryl's importance in my life. I find it strange that I'm agreeing with SW on anything, but Cheryl is a very angry, immature, self-important individual. And she quite frankly doesn't cross my mind at all unless she's pulling yet another stupid stunt to draw attention to herself. So maybe if she doesn't want the notoriety, she should stop the temper tantrums and grow up?

Hi fantastic website! Does running a blog like this take a lot of work? I have no expertise in computer programming however I was hoping to start my own blog soon. Anyways, if you have any ideas or tips for new blog owners please share.I understand this is off topic nevertheless I just wanted to ask.

Hey there just wanted to give you a quick heads up. The words in your content seem to be running off the screen in Internet explorer. I'm not sure if this is a formatting issue or something to do with internet browser compatibility but I figured I'd post to let you know.The design and style look great though! Hope you get the problem fixed soon. Kudos

Woah! I'm really loving the template/theme of this website. It's simple,yet effective. A lot of times it's hard to get that "perfect balance" between superb usability and visual appeal. I must say you have done a excellent job with this. Additionally, the blog loads very fast for me on Opera. Superb Blog!

Wow! I'm really enjoying the design of your web site. Are you using a customized template or is this readily available to all individuals? If you do not want to say the name of it out in the public, please make sure to email me at: danabone@gmail.com. I'd really enjoy to get my hands on this template!Thanks a lot.